Why do we have fervent Pats** supporters on TSW?

[Deranged Rhino]

 

Actually, I linked to a post from early last season attacking the Pats.

 

That's why I said only 2,068 of your 2,075 posts are defending the *pats. You need to have a few posts where you feign indifference, just to keep the ruse going.

[FireChan]

 

I called no one a fan. I used the words "support" and "defend" as those terms would apply to arguing in favor of or against a particular topic -- in this case, Brady* and the Pats**.

 

You've yet to explain your rationale for engaging in continuous, largely irrelevant debates with Bills fans -- on a Bills message board -- in which you passionately provide arguments in defense of a hated rival who has now been found "responsible" for cheating at least twice.

 

It's not "intellectual" conversation or an "adult" exchange -- it's petty and seemingly intended only to inflame.

It actually quite simple. People view events and write down their thoughts on those events, without putting them through the lens of someone who has a ulterior motive in how they view those events. The quality of the evidence can be called in to question. The "responsibility" can be called into question. People have different opinions, and don't paint themselves as "Bills' fans" first, people second.

Edited May 12, 2015 by FireChan

[Mr. WEO]

 

I called no one a fan. I used the words "support" and "defend" as those terms would apply to arguing in favor of or against a particular topic -- in this case, Brady* and the Pats**.

 

You've yet to explain your rationale for engaging in continuous, largely irrelevant debates with Bills fans -- on a Bills message board -- in which you passionately provide arguments in defense of a hated rival who has now been found "responsible" for cheating at least twice.

 

It's not "intellectual" conversation or an "adult" exchange -- it's petty and seemingly intended only to inflame.

 

Well, all of this is essentially "irrelevant" in that it doesn't have anything to do with the Bills. I'm particpating in the conversation. Many small details are being dissected by many. If it inflames you, I can't help that other than to be more sensitive to your tenderness. I will certainly try.

 

 

Here you go with the semantics again. NO and Rose were both punished for things they did within the context of games, which is clearly distinct from the nature of crimes that Rice, Peterson and Lewis allegedly committed. That was obviously the point.

 

"but there is special consideration for guys who !@#$ with things between the lines. It's why the Saints were punished so harshly and why Pete Rose is still suspended from baseball."

 

Brady cheated on the field. NO paid guys to injure other guys. Rose never cheated on the field, he bet on games...as a coach.

 

Semantics? Use better words, I guess.

Edited May 12, 2015 by Mr. WEO

[eball]

It actually quite simple. People view events and write down their thoughts on those events, without putting them through the lens of someone who has a ulterior motive in how they view those events. The quality of the evidence can be called in to question. The "responsibility" can be called into question. People have different opinions, and don't paint themselves as "Bills' fans" first, people second.

 

You've explained nothing that relates to the premise of this thread.

 

Well, all of this is essentially "irrelevant" in that it doesn't have anything to do with the Bills. I'm particpating in the conversation. Many small details are being dissected by many. If it inflames you, I can't help that other than to be more sensitive to your tenderness. I will certainly try.

 

I'm not inflamed, I'm curious. You'll notice I don't engage you in those discussions because I know you're just baiting others. I still don't see the point.

[Jets Hater]

NE is a great team and have been for 15 years but I hate them. Which side of the fence does that put me

[KD in CA]

 

Well, all of this is essentially "irrelevant" in that it doesn't have anything to do with the Bills. I'm particpating in the conversation. Many small details are being dissected by many. If it inflames you, I can't help that other than to be more sensitive to your tenderness. I will certainly try.

 

 

"but there is special consideration for guys who !@#$ with things between the lines. It's why the Saints were punished so harshly and why Pete Rose is still suspended from baseball."

 

Brady cheated on the field. NO paid guys to injure other guys. Rose never cheated on the field, he bet on games...as a coach.

 

Semantics? Use better words, I guess.

 

Or maybe you could use a better brain while attempting to read. Your inability to decipher anything that isn't spoon fed to you precisely is remarkable.

 

Paying to injure guys on the field isn't against the rules? Managers gambling on their own baseball games isn't against the rules? Uh...ok.

[Clippers of Nfl]

I'm a huge Bills fan, and not remotely interested in any other sports team. period. The situation that Tom Brady is in right now, could EASILY happen to one of our own players/coaches. It something that has been blown all out of proportion.

 

Bitter fans attacking a successful person, and a media driven frenzy...ugly to watch, and provides a platform for the most extreme, and most vehement nut-jobs.

Let me quote a fan of the Vikings.

 

"Loving it"

 

Well, all of this is essentially "irrelevant" in that it doesn't have anything to do with the Bills. I'm particpating in the conversation. Many small details are being dissected by many. If it inflames you, I can't help that other than to be more sensitive to your tenderness. I will certainly try.

 

 

"but there is special consideration for guys who !@#$ with things between the lines. It's why the Saints were punished so harshly and why Pete Rose is still suspended from baseball."

 

Brady cheated on the field. NO paid guys to injure other guys. Rose never cheated on the field, he bet on games...as a coach.

 

Semantics? Use better words, I guess.

Do you know how ridiculous that sounds.

 

A coach betting on his team to either win or lose?

 

That is acceptable to you somehow

NE is a great team and have been for 15 years but I hate them. Which side of the fence does that put me

That puts you on the pats side.

They cannot be great when they have cheated many times for many years.

 

I like the hate part tho.

[FireChan]

 

You've explained nothing that relates to the premise of this thread.

 

 

I'm not inflamed, I'm curious. You'll notice I don't engage you in those discussions because I know you're just baiting others. I still don't see the point.

That's because the premise of your thread is incorrect.

[eball]

NE is a great team and have been for 15 years but I hate them. Which side of the fence does that put me

 

Clearly, you hate the Jets.

[Kelly the Dog]

Well considering it's a message board to discuss topics, it's reasonable to expect people to have opinions on all facets of a topic.

 

Here is the real problem...the moment someone says a single word on the "less popular" side of the discussion, in this case what you would call defending some part of the Pats side, all kinds of people incapable of participating in a rational discussion start bashing, attacking, name calling, etc and frequently failing to even contribute anything to the thread and just insisting the other poster is a "Pats Fan" and all their posts are about only that. That then triggers responses by the poster who presented the Pats side and forces them to defend themselves and makes their point now look like some exaggerated stance in defense of the Pats when really it's just a provoked response to irrational comments in most cases.

 

As far as this topic goes...here is the bottom line. Bill Polian said it best. After spygate, the NFL put rules, guidelines and processes in place to protect the integrity of the game at all costs. The requirement were triggered for discipline in the findings, and most importantly, any investigation requires without debate 100% cooperation by the organization. In the end, decisions from the Pats side, especially Brady in not giving up his phone, and lying impeded the investigation and severe punishment is being administered.

 

Personally, the air pressure in the football is being so overly exaggerated. The actual incident is minor, and at best a fine was in order, but definitely not a suspension. However, directly refusing to cooperate in an investigation to protect the integrity of the game stemming from a playoff game, and lying on top of that, is a very different story and more severe action was needed.

 

I think the penalty was too steep, Brady should have had no more than 2 games IMO and I don't think the Pats should have lost a 1st and a 4th round pick. More appropriate would be 2 games for Tom and $1,000,000 fine to organization. And if you want to apply a loss of picks, then one fourth round pick would be more appropriate.

 

If they had just said that Tom likes them with less air and the ball boy went too far, I think all of this goes away and only a fine would have happened. But they broke very serious protocol that was developed because of the Patriots and Spygate in the first place, so I understand the severity even if I think it's a bit much. I expect the appeal to win some sort of reduction but I still think Tom serves at least 2 games.

 

Personally I would rather beat the Pats with Tom in week 2, but I am taking lots of personal enjoyment harassing a few friends who are Pats fans about all this hahahaha. F the Pats and Go Bills!!!! This is our year regardless IMO

I have argued a lot with you over this issue, and about several different elements of it, but this is a very good post.

Let me quote a fan of the Vikings.

 

"Loving it"

Do you know how ridiculous that sounds.

 

A coach betting on his team to either win or lose?

 

That is acceptable to you somehow

Rose never bet on his team to lose in a game he was managing or playing. Ever. It was always to win. Not that it excuses "betting on games is against the rules" one bit, but it;s a huge difference.

[NoSaint]

Well considering it's a message board to discuss topics, it's reasonable to expect people to have opinions on all facets of a topic.

 

Here is the real problem...the moment someone says a single word on the "less popular" side of the discussion, in this case what you would call defending some part of the Pats side, all kinds of people incapable of participating in a rational discussion start bashing, attacking, name calling, etc and frequently failing to even contribute anything to the thread and just insisting the other poster is a "Pats Fan" and all their posts are about only that. That then triggers responses by the poster who presented the Pats side and forces them to defend themselves and makes their point now look like some exaggerated stance in defense of the Pats when really it's just a provoked response to irrational comments in most cases.

 

As far as this topic goes...here is the bottom line. Bill Polian said it best. After spygate, the NFL put rules, guidelines and processes in place to protect the integrity of the game at all costs. The requirement were triggered for discipline in the findings, and most importantly, any investigation requires without debate 100% cooperation by the organization. In the end, decisions from the Pats side, especially Brady in not giving up his phone, and lying impeded the investigation and severe punishment is being administered.

 

Personally, the air pressure in the football is being so overly exaggerated. The actual incident is minor, and at best a fine was in order, but definitely not a suspension. However, directly refusing to cooperate in an investigation to protect the integrity of the game stemming from a playoff game, and lying on top of that, is a very different story and more severe action was needed.

 

I think the penalty was too steep, Brady should have had no more than 2 games IMO and I don't think the Pats should have lost a 1st and a 4th round pick. More appropriate would be 2 games for Tom and $1,000,000 fine to organization. And if you want to apply a loss of picks, then one fourth round pick would be more appropriate.

 

If they had just said that Tom likes them with less air and the ball boy went too far, I think all of this goes away and only a fine would have happened. But they broke very serious protocol that was developed because of the Patriots and Spygate in the first place, so I understand the severity even if I think it's a bit much. I expect the appeal to win some sort of reduction but I still think Tom serves at least 2 games.

 

Personally I would rather beat the Pats with Tom in week 2, but I am taking lots of personal enjoyment harassing a few friends who are Pats fans about all this hahahaha. F the Pats and Go Bills!!!! This is our year regardless IMO

i missed this one, until KTD quoted it. without quibbling over minor numbers in the punishment, its not far from where i fall. Im pretty much fine with a month out between the incident and the aftermath. given the nfls erratic nature, i think its in my range of "that works."

[KollegeStudnet]

Bills fan 100%, but I dig the Pats and consider it a very competitive organization since Kraft took over.

Now, am I a Pats fan? No!

 

But, do I respect their organization? Hell to the yes!

 

The Hood is one of the greatest analytical coaches of my time and *Brady is one of the greatest game managers of all time.

 

Talking with a former Bill about playing the Pats during the Williams/Mularkey/Jauron years always produces how prepared the team was in playing. Yes they got busted videotaping, but its hard to translate calls and predict audibles in such a fast paced between downs. One thing I will say, is this former Bill would tell stories on how well prepared the Pats are. Physical. Smart. Never Giving Up.

Edited May 12, 2015 by KollegeStudnet

[maddenboy]

Its good that Pats fans are here. It means this site is a good one.

 

I wonder how many Bills fans visit Pats sites, versus them coming here.

 

I keep hearing that this site has a nice reputation around the league, and that many fans in other cities are jealous.

 

I think that's your answer right there.

[Jets Hater]

 

 

 

That puts you on the pats side.

They cannot be great when they have cheated many times for many years.

 

I like the hate part tho.

On a more serious note, I truly think they are a great team, and would have had the same amount of success( or close too ) without the cheating. That makes it more of an head scratcher for me..They didn't have to do it. Why even try ?

[eball]

Well considering it's a message board to discuss topics, it's reasonable to expect people to have opinions on all facets of a topic.

 

Here is the real problem...the moment someone says a single word on the "less popular" side of the discussion, in this case what you would call defending some part of the Pats side, all kinds of people incapable of participating in a rational discussion start bashing, attacking, name calling, etc and frequently failing to even contribute anything to the thread and just insisting the other poster is a "Pats Fan" and all their posts are about only that. That then triggers responses by the poster who presented the Pats side and forces them to defend themselves and makes their point now look like some exaggerated stance in defense of the Pats when really it's just a provoked response to irrational comments in most cases.

 

As far as this topic goes...here is the bottom line. Bill Polian said it best. After spygate, the NFL put rules, guidelines and processes in place to protect the integrity of the game at all costs. The requirement were triggered for discipline in the findings, and most importantly, any investigation requires without debate 100% cooperation by the organization. In the end, decisions from the Pats side, especially Brady in not giving up his phone, and lying impeded the investigation and severe punishment is being administered.

 

Personally, the air pressure in the football is being so overly exaggerated. The actual incident is minor, and at best a fine was in order, but definitely not a suspension. However, directly refusing to cooperate in an investigation to protect the integrity of the game stemming from a playoff game, and lying on top of that, is a very different story and more severe action was needed.

 

I think the penalty was too steep, Brady should have had no more than 2 games IMO and I don't think the Pats should have lost a 1st and a 4th round pick. More appropriate would be 2 games for Tom and $1,000,000 fine to organization. And if you want to apply a loss of picks, then one fourth round pick would be more appropriate.

 

If they had just said that Tom likes them with less air and the ball boy went too far, I think all of this goes away and only a fine would have happened. But they broke very serious protocol that was developed because of the Patriots and Spygate in the first place, so I understand the severity even if I think it's a bit much. I expect the appeal to win some sort of reduction but I still think Tom serves at least 2 games.

 

Personally I would rather beat the Pats with Tom in week 2, but I am taking lots of personal enjoyment harassing a few friends who are Pats fans about all this hahahaha. F the Pats and Go Bills!!!! This is our year regardless IMO

 

I appreciate this response; thanks. I have a bit of a different view on the seriousness of the air pressure issue (I think there is a smoking gun somewhere on Brady*'s phone), and will be curious to see how further investigation into the Pats** post-2007 activities plays out.

 

My take on the Pats** dynasty is that while we have no idea just how much cheating has played into their success, at this point I can almost certainly say it's not "none." And that's enough to taint the whole thing.

 

Anyway, I've seen enough in response to my original question to have satisfied myself.

[Mr. WEO]

 

You've explained nothing that relates to the premise of this thread.

 

I'm not inflamed, I'm curious. You'll notice I don't engage you in those discussions because I know you're just baiting others. I still don't see the point.

 

Put that on your craigslist profile! (kidding!).

 

Look, I don't start threads about NE--that's a fetish many here have. I will respond to things I find interesting. I will challenge things I think are wrong or incorrect. That's not baiting.

 

This thread is only for baiting....

 

 

Or maybe you could use a better brain while attempting to read. Your inability to decipher anything that isn't spoon fed to you precisely is remarkable.

 

Paying to injure guys on the field isn't against the rules? Managers gambling on their own baseball games isn't against the rules? Uh...ok.

 

 

 

Yes, I am a bit slow. But yes, NO and Rose broke rules. Brady cheated on the field. That's a distinction that you made. So, they weren't appropriate examples, is what I'm saying.

 

Let me quote a fan of the Vikings.

 

"Loving it"

Do you know how ridiculous that sounds.

 

A coach betting on his team to either win or lose?

 

That is acceptable to you somehow

That puts you on the pats side.

They cannot be great when they have cheated many times for many years.

 

I like the hate part tho.

 

No, it's not acceptable. I'm not sure how you concluded that from any of my posts.

Well considering it's a message board to discuss topics, it's reasonable to expect people to have opinions on all facets of a topic.

 

Here is the real problem...the moment someone says a single word on the "less popular" side of the discussion, in this case what you would call defending some part of the Pats side, all kinds of people incapable of participating in a rational discussion start bashing, attacking, name calling, etc and frequently failing to even contribute anything to the thread and just insisting the other poster is a "Pats Fan" and all their posts are about only that. That then triggers responses by the poster who presented the Pats side and forces them to defend themselves and makes their point now look like some exaggerated stance in defense of the Pats when really it's just a provoked response to irrational comments in most cases.

 

As far as this topic goes...here is the bottom line. Bill Polian said it best. After spygate, the NFL put rules, guidelines and processes in place to protect the integrity of the game at all costs. The requirement were triggered for discipline in the findings, and most importantly, any investigation requires without debate 100% cooperation by the organization. In the end, decisions from the Pats side, especially Brady in not giving up his phone, and lying impeded the investigation and severe punishment is being administered.

 

Personally, the air pressure in the football is being so overly exaggerated. The actual incident is minor, and at best a fine was in order, but definitely not a suspension. However, directly refusing to cooperate in an investigation to protect the integrity of the game stemming from a playoff game, and lying on top of that, is a very different story and more severe action was needed.

 

I think the penalty was too steep, Brady should have had no more than 2 games IMO and I don't think the Pats should have lost a 1st and a 4th round pick. More appropriate would be 2 games for Tom and $1,000,000 fine to organization. And if you want to apply a loss of picks, then one fourth round pick would be more appropriate.

 

If they had just said that Tom likes them with less air and the ball boy went too far, I think all of this goes away and only a fine would have happened. But they broke very serious protocol that was developed because of the Patriots and Spygate in the first place, so I understand the severity even if I think it's a bit much. I expect the appeal to win some sort of reduction but I still think Tom serves at least 2 games.

 

Personally I would rather beat the Pats with Tom in week 2, but I am taking lots of personal enjoyment harassing a few friends who are Pats fans about all this hahahaha. F the Pats and Go Bills!!!! This is our year regardless IMO

 

 

I agree with this pats fan right here.

 

Good post!

[Clippers of Nfl]

Bills fan 100%, but I dig the Pats and consider it a very competitive organization since Kraft took over.

Now, am I a Pats fan? No!

 

But, do I respect their organization? Hell to the yes!

 

The Hood is one of the greatest analytical coaches of my time and *Brady is one of the greatest game managers of all time.

 

Talking with a former Bill about playing the Pats during the Williams/Mularkey/Jauron years always produces how prepared the team was in playing. Yes they got busted videotaping, but its hard to translate calls and predict audibles in such a fast paced between downs. One thing I will say, is this former Bill would tell stories on how well prepared the Pats are. Physical. Smart. Never Giving Up.

Pats fan.

See I cant type that.

 

It should read. But do I respect their org? "Maybe or even yeah. Or even I hate to admit it, but yes."

 

Hell to the yes????

 

This is a bills site

[BillsFan-4-Ever]

when you cheat repeatedly... how can you expect to be respected?

[May Day 10]

 

Rose never bet on his team to lose in a game he was managing or playing. Ever. It was always to win. Not that it excuses "betting on games is against the rules" one bit, but it;s a huge difference.

 

Even if it was to win. It could influence his decisions to fix games. He could hold out players/pitchers, save them for the next game to double down. Betting to win or lose for a manager is bad.

[Alphadawg7]

I have argued a lot with you over this issue, and about several different elements of it, but this is a very good post.

 

I have no problem with you disagreeing with me over this issue, at least you argue things you appear to strongly believe. I don't even have a problem if the debate gets heated, all good debates do and I don't take it personally. Thats the entire purpose of this forum.

 

The issue is not the debate, the issue is when people start labeling people "Fan boys" or "Haters" (depending on what side of a debate you are on) because you don't share their opinion about a particular subject and they literally have nothing else to say or contribute to the topic. In all fairness, there are people on here who are or have been "Haters" or "Fanboys" about certain people or topics and will state just about any ridiculousness, name call, exaggerate, make stuff up, etc to irrational levels to further that agenda. But too often people get incorrectly labeled in those categories because they have a different opinion on a subject, are critical of a certain player, etc.

 

For instance...just because someone didn't like Kyle Orton and thought he stunk did NOT make them a EJ fan boy, and vice versa...it meant, using your eyes you could see Orton sucks. But if you said Orton sucks, then people would jump all over you and just say you are an EJ Fan Boy trying to make Orton look bad to defend EJ. Which is an impossible way to carry on any rational discussion and its what causes so many unnecessarily long threads/arguments.